The effect of talk and writing on learning science: An exploratory study

By Léonard P. Rivard, Stanley B. Straw. 2000

446 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Education

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/bb2d2e8eadacaa838911d9cec2ab6fdb47728a1a

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Education

Citations in the corpus

Examining the Use of Talk and Writing for Students' Development of Scientific Conceptual Knowledge Through Constructing and Critiquing Arguments (2016, background): “That is, students use either talk or writing first in one event (e.g., small group discussion, whole class discussion), and then the other learning tool is used in a following event (e.g., individual reflection writing, individual concept mapping) (e.g., Rivard, 2004; Rivard & Straw, 2000).”
Collaborative reasoning: a dialogic approach to group discussions (2009, background): “This effort was motivated by research suggesting that the use of argumentative discourse in science results in the development of both argumentative skill and a deeper understanding of the subject matter knowledge (Driver, Newton, & Osborne, 2001; Rivard & Straw, 2000).”
What students learn in problem-based learning: a process analysis (2012, background): “Several studies have shown that peer discussion is important for sharing knowledge and increasing the ‘‘collective knowledge of a group’’ ( Rivard and Straw 2000; Hmelo-Silver and Barrows 2008).”
LEARNING ARGUMENTATION SKILLS THROUGH INSTRUCTION IN SOCIOSCIENTIFIC ISSUES: THE EFFECT OF ABILITY LEVEL (2010, background): “Rivard & Straw (2000) suggested that low achievers are better able to learn science when they have an opportunity to engage in classroom talk, whereas high achievers benefit more from writing than”
Writing‐to‐learn Strategies in Secondary School Cell Biology: A mixed method study (2006, background): “These studies utilizing writing as part of the instructional sequence have been conducted at various classroom levels: elementary (Duschl & Ellenbogen, 2002; Mason, 1998), middle school (Fellows, 1994; Keys, 1999b), and high school (Hand et al., 2002; Rivard & Straw, 2000).”
Examining the Utility of Elementary Science Notebooks for Formative Assessment Purposes (2006, background): “…of researchers who advocate writing in science to enhance student understanding of scientific content and processes, as well as general writing skills (Bass, Baxter, & Glaser, 2001; Baxter, Bass, & Glaser, 2000; Keys, Hand, Prain, & Collins, 1999; Rivard & Straw, 2000; Shepardson & Britsch, 1997).”
Using a Science Writing Heuristic to enhance learning outcomes from laboratory activities in seventh‐grade science: quantitative and qualitative aspects (2004, background): “…science in a classroom context will be greatly enhanced by instruction that not only addresses the issue of scientific composition, but also the social cognitive processes inherent in activities such as questioning, data interpretation, asserting claims, and using evidence (Rivard and Straw 2000).”
Implementation of a Peer-Led Team Learning Instructional Approach in an Undergraduate Organic Chemistry Course. (2002, background): “The element of peer discussion is important for ‘‘sharing, clarifying, and distributing knowledge among peers’’ (Rivard & Straw, 2000, p. 585).”
The Challenges of Scientific Literacy: From the viewpoint of second‐generation cognitive science (2006, background): “Rivard and Straw ( 2000 ) explored the effects of talk and writing as they interacted with gender, immediately and after a delay, to affect simple and integrated knowledge.”
A study of students' construction of science knowledge: talk and writing in a collaborative group (2007, background): “Speech and writing complement one another (Rivard & Straw, 2000).”
Learning to Teach Argumentation: Research and development in the science classroom (2006, background): “Oral work was therefore an important aspect of argumentation tasks, but could be supported by the use of writing both during debate and as follow‐up work in order to enhance students’ argumentation (Rivard & Straw, 2000 ).”
Constructing discussion tasks in university tutorials: shifting dynamics and identities (2002, unknown): “[1461-4456 (200211) 4:4; 429–453; 028023] learning (e.g. Aulls, 1998; Empson, 1999; Rivard and Straw, 2000).”